linux-kernel - Re: [RFC -tip] x86: introduce X86_ assembly names macros to catch unbalanced declaration

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:22:57 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc:	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -tip] x86: introduce X86_ assembly names macros to catch
	unbalanced declaration


* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:

> It's usefull to catch unbalanced or messed declarations of ENTRY and
> KPROBES. These macros would help a bit (at least I hope so).
> 
> For example the following code would compile without problems
> 
> 	X86_ENTRY(mcount)
> 		retq
> 	X86_END(mcount)
> 
> But if you forget and mess the following form
> 
> 	X86_ENTRY(mcount)
> 		retq
> 	END(mcount)
> 
> 	X86_ENTRY(ftrace_caller)
> 
> The assembler will issue the following message:
> Error: X86_ENTRY/KPROBE unbalanced or missed

looks good - a very small detail: i'd suggest ENTRY_X86()/END_X86() - 
because whoever is reading this portion of the code is amply aware of 
the fact that this is the x86 tree - so the more important information 
should come first.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/